“Secrecy envelopes” were required in Pennsylvania by a Democrat judge, with the judge ruling that mail-in votes must be used to guarantee voter-privacy. But now corrupt Dem count-every-voters are calling up retarded Biden voters, to tell them to come in and “cure” their invalid votes, and their ballots will end up in court being very publicly argued over.

The Pennsylvania election-theft was predicted:

How ‘naked ballots’ in Pennsylvania could cost Joe Biden the election

Jonathan Lai, AP, September 21, 2020

The 2020 presidential election could come down to envelopes.

The state Supreme Court in Pennsylvania, a critical battleground state that’s seen as increasingly likely to determine who wins the White House, last week ordered officials to throw out “naked ballots” — mail ballots that arrive without inner “secrecy envelopes.”

Pennsylvania uses a two-envelope mail ballot system: A completed ballot goes into a “secrecy envelope” that has no identifying information, and then into a larger mailing envelope that the voter signs.

It’s unclear how many naked ballots there will be, because this is the first year any Pennsylvania voter can vote by mail, and most counties counted them in the June primary without tracking how many there were.

But Philadelphia’s top elections official warned Monday that the court’s ruling “is going to cause electoral chaos,” lead to tens of thousands of votes being thrown out, and put the state at the center of “significant postelection legal controversy, the likes of which we have not seen since Florida in 2000.”

The decision ordering them thrown out was part of a trio of rulings Thursday that, among other things, extended the deadline for voters to send mail ballots back, permitted the use of drop boxes for voters to return them, and removed the Green Party’s presidential ticket from the ballot.

Taken together, those rulings were seen as likely to give Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden’s campaign a boost, since Democrats are expected to vote by mail in far greater number than Republicans this year.

But throwing out naked ballots could be costly for Biden, in a state President Donald Trump won by only about 44,000 votes in 2016, or less than 1%.

“While everyone is talking about the significance of extending the mail-ballot deadline, it is the naked ballot ruling that is going to cause electoral chaos,” Lisa Deeley, chair of the Philadelphia city commissioners, wrote in a letter to state legislative leaders urging them to change the law to allow the ballots to be counted.

Deeley warned there will likely be tens of thousands thrown out — maybe more than 100,000.

“As public servants, we owe it to all citizens to avoid this situation, and the likely chaos that would come with it,” Deeley wrote to Senate President Pro Tempore Joe Scarnati (R., Jefferson) and House Speaker Bryan Cutler (R., Lancaster).

The concern over naked ballots is just the latest point of confusion and contention in an campaign season filled with lawsuits and legislative wrangling, which have left the basic rules of the election up in the air even as counties begin to send voters mail ballots.

Here’s what you need to know.

What are naked ballots?

When counting mail ballots, elections officials first check the information on the mailing envelope to confirm the validity of the vote. Then the outer envelope is opened and the secrecy envelope containing the ballot is set aside.

From that point forward, the vote is anonymous.

Naked ballots are ones without those secrecy envelopes. Nothing else is necessarily improper with the ballots themselves or the mailing envelopes.

What was the court ruling?

The Trump campaign and other Republicans sued Pennsylvania in federal court over several election rules, including arguing that naked ballots should not be counted. The state Democratic Party filed a countersuit in state court.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled they should be thrown out under state law.

“It is clear that the legislature believed that an orderly canvass of mail-in ballots required the completion of two discrete steps before critical identifying information on the ballot could be revealed. The omission of a secrecy envelope defeats this intention,” wrote Justice Max Baer, a Democrat.

Thus, Baer wrote for the court, “we hold that the secrecy provision … is mandatory and the mail-in elector’s failure to comply with such requisite by enclosing the ballot in the secrecy envelope renders the ballot invalid.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.